1 / 35

Longitudinal FreeSurfer

Longitudinal FreeSurfer. Martin Reuter mreuter@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu http:// reuter.mit.edu. What can we do with FreeSurfer ?. measure volume of cortical or subcortical structures compute thickness (locally) of the cortical sheet study differences of populations (diseased, control).

chesna
Download Presentation

Longitudinal FreeSurfer

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Longitudinal FreeSurfer Martin Reuter mreuter@nmr.mgh.harvard.edu http://reuter.mit.edu

  2. What can we do with FreeSurfer? • measure volume of cortical or subcortical structures • compute thickness (locally) of the cortical sheet • study differences of populations (diseased, control)

  3. We'd like to: • exploit longitudinal information • (same subject, different time points)) Why longitudinal? • to reduce variability on intra-individual morph. estimates • to detect small changes, or use less subjects (power) • for marker of disease progression (atrophy) • to better estimate time to onset of symptoms • to study effects of drug treatment • ... • [Reuter et al, NeuroImage 2012]

  4. Example 1

  5. Example 2

  6. Challenges in Longitudinal Designs • Over-Regularization: • Temporal smoothing • Non-linear warps • Potentially underestimating change • Limited designs: • Only 2 time points • Special purposes (e.g. only surfaces, WM/GM) • Bias[Reuter and Fischl 2011] , [Reuter et al 2012] • Interpolation Asymmetries [Yushkevich et al 2010] • Asymmetric Information Transfer • Often overestimating change

  7. How can it be done? • Stay unbiased with respect to any specific time point by treating all the same • Create a within subject template (base) as an initial guess for segmentation and reconstruction • Initialize each time point with the template to reduce variability in the optimization process • For this we need a robust registration (rigid) and template estimation

  8. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010]

  9. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010] • Goal: Highly accurate inverse consistent registrations • In the presence of: • Noise • Gradient non-linearities • Movement: jaw, tongue, neck, eye, scalp ... • Cropping • Atrophy (or other longitudinal change) • We need: • Inverse consistency keep registration unbiased‏ • Robust statistics to reduce influence of outliers

  10. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010] Inverse consistency: • a symmetric displacement model: • resample both source and target to an unbiased half-way space in intermediate steps (matrix square root) Source Target Half-Way

  11. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010](c.f. Nestares and Heeger, 2000) Limited contribution for outliers [Nestares&Heeger 2000] Square Tukey'sBiweight

  12. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010] Tumor data courtesy of Dr. Greg Sorensen Tumor data with significant intensity differences in the brain, registered to first time point (left).

  13. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010] Target Target

  14. Robust Registration [Reuter et al 2010] Registered Src FSL FLIRT Registered Src Robust

  15. Inverse Consitencyof mri_robust_register • Inverse consistency of different methods on original (orig), intensity normalized (T1) and skull stripped (norm) images. • LS and Robust: • nearly perfect symmetry (worst case RMS < 0.02) • Other methods: • several alignments with RMS errors > 0.1

  16. Accuracy of mri_robust_register • Performance of different methods on test-retest scans, with respect to SPM skull stripped brain registration (norm). • The brain-only registrations are very similar • Robust shows better performance for original (orig) or normalized (T1) full head images

  17. mri_robust_register • mri_robust_registeris part of FreeSurfer • can be used for pair-wise registration (optimally within subject, within modality) • can output results in half-way space • can output ‘outlier-weights’ • see also Reuter et al. “Highly Accurate Inverse Consistent Registration: A Robust Approach”, NeuroImage 2010. http://reuter.mit.edu/publications/ • for more than 2 images: mri_robust_template

  18. Robust Template

  19. Robust Template Estimation • Minimization problem for N images: • Image Dissimilarity: • Metric of Transformations:

  20. Robust Template Intrinsic median: • (Initialization) • Create median image • Register with median (unbiased) • Iterate until convergence Command: mri_robust_template

  21. Robust Template: MEDIAN Top: difference Left: mean Right: median The mean is more blurry in regions with change: Ventricles or Corpus Callosum Median: • Crisp • Faster convergence • No ghosts

  22. Longitudinal Processing

  23. Robust Template for Initialization • Unbiased • Reduces Variability • Common space for: • - TIV estimation • - Skullstrip • - Affine Talairach Reg. • Basis for: • - Intensity Normalization • - Non-linear Reg. • - Surfaces / Parcellation

  24. FreeSurfer Commands (recon-all) 1.CROSS (independently for each time point tpNid): 2. BASE (creates template, one for each subject): recon-all -base baseid -tp tp1id \ -tp tp2id ... -all 3. LONG (for each time point tpNid, passing baseid): recon-all -long tpNid baseid -all recon-all -subjid tpNid -all This creates the final directories tpNid.long.baseid

  25. Biased Information Transfer [Reuter… 2012] Subcortical Cortical Biased information transfer: [BASE1] and [BASE2]. Our method [FS-LONG] [FS-LONG-rev] shows no bias.

  26. Simulated Atrophy (2% left Hippo.) Left Hippocampus Right Hippocampus Cross sectional RED, longitudinal GREEN Simulated atrophy was applied to the left hippocampus only

  27. Test-Retest Reliability [Reuter et al 2012] Subcortical Cortical [LONG] significantly improves reliability 115 subjects, ME MPRAGE, 2 scans, same session

  28. Test-Retest Reliability[Reuter et al 2012] Diff. ([CROSS]-[LONG]) of Abs. Thick. Change: Significance Map [LONG] significantly improves reliability 115 subjects, ME MPRAGE, 2 scans, same session

  29. Increased Power [Reuter et al 2012] Left Hemisphere: Right Hemisphere Sample Size Reduction when using [LONG]

  30. Huntington’s Disease (3 visits) Independent Processing Longitudinal Processing [LONG] shows higher precision and better discrimination power between groups (specificity and sensitivity).

  31. Huntington’s Disease (3 visits) Rate of Atrophy Baseline Vol. (normalized) Putamen Atrophy Rate can is significant between CN and PHD far, but baseline volume is not.

  32. Longitudinal Tutorial

  33. Longitudinal Tutorial • How to process longitudinal data • Three stages: CROSS, BASE, LONG • Post-processing • Preparing your data for a statistical analysis • 2 time points, rate or percent change • Manual Edits • Start in CROSS, do BASE, then LONGs should be fixed automatically • Often it is enough to just edit the BASE • See http://freesurfer.net/fswiki/LongitudinalEdits

  34. Longitudinal Tutorial • Temporal Average • Rate of Change • Percent Change (w.r.t. time 1) • Symmetrized Percent Change (w.r.t. temp. avg.)

  35. Still to come … • Future Improvements: • Same voxel space for all time points (in FS 5.1) • Common warps (non-linear) • Intracranial volume estimation • Joint intensity normalization • New thickness computation • Joint spherical registration http://freesurfer.net/fswiki/LongitudinalProcessing http://reuter.mit.edu Thanks to: the FreeSurfer Team, specifically Bruce Fischl and Nick Schmansky

More Related